methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
A paper-based illustration representing arc42 with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
arc42
Funnel Analysis workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
Funnel Analysis
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent
arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.When many visitors or users drop off along the way, the reason behind the number often stays hidden. Funnel Analysis exposes these transitions and makes visible exactly where the path collapses.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage1-3 h1-4 Wochen15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
1-41-51-61-3
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment ViewFunnel report, Drop-off analysis, Optimization hypothesesExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication
AnalyticsConversionGrowth
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Add more methods